Turner addresses concerns about heritage-designated houses

In the ever-changing world of heritage legislation, Emily Turner, from the Kawartha Lakes economic planning department, sees regular communication with council and residents of the city who have questions about the topic as one of her key duties.

As part of her outreach, Turner has found her plate full in February and March of 2023 with a recent presentation to council about the ongoing heritage registry, a public presentation to the Lindsay Canadian Club on local heritage policy and a keynote address to council next month on the impact that provincial legislation, in the form of Bill 23, will have on existing city policies regarding architectural heritage and preservation.

Listing and designating heritage properties

Following her address to council in early February, Councillor Ron Ashmore, who sits on the city heritage committee, asked Turner to explain for the public the difference between a property being listed and designated by the city as a heritage property and how either label impacts the property owner.

“It is the number one question that comes up from the public (regarding heritage),” Ashmore said.

“A listing of the property by the city places a 60 day hold on the demolition of the property,” Turner said. “You need to provide an application for demolition and council can say ‘no’. A designation is done through by-law because only council can officially designate a property. With a listed building, if they want to do renovations we don’t care. The designated properties are a little different. The designation as a heritage property is added to the legal title of the property.”

“If the owner (of a designated property) wants to make changes to the exterior of the property they are required to get a heritage permit,” Turner said. “We will screen any renovations or changes they want to do to make sure it fits the heritage value of the property. If the owners want to put an addition on their designated property, they have to file a heritage permit and say what they want to do. We can work with them to ensure that the design they choose is consistent with the heritage attributes of the property.”

In a follow-up telephone interview with the Advocate, Turner was asked if there are misconceptions regarding issues like property value and insurance costs after a historical listing that need  to be addressed?

“There are a few things,” Turner said. “There are a lot of misconceptions and a ton of confusion because people don’t know what listing and designation (in a heritage sense) truly mean. People are concerned about the level of control they will have over their own property. People are afraid they won’t be able to make changes, renovate or put a pool in. People are quite concerned they won’t be able to do what they want to do with their property.”

Turner pointed out that since the heritage listing and designation process began in earnest in 2019, only five properties identified by the city have been asked by owners to be removed.

“Initially, some property owners have expressed concerns about declining property values after a heritage identification,” Turner said. “All the academic studies that we have from Canada and the United States indicate that there is no net gain or loss because of being added to a heritage registry.”

Turner did admit that issues surrounding property insurance can initially be a little trickier, but seldom remain a problem for an extended time period.

“Insurance can be a little more complicated,” Turner said. “Sometimes after being designated as a heritage property insurance goes up. Insurance companies can struggle with the idea of a designation, and with concerns about replacement and rebuilding the structure costs go up.”

 When heritage designated properties have found their premiums going up, Turner has spoken to the insurers on behalf of the property owners. Generally, after a conversation with Turner, the problem gets sorted and the premium increase disappears.

“We have certainly also interacted with people who do not want the government at any level to have say about what they do with their property,” Turner added.

 Turner said the listing or designation process is controlled by provincial legislation and not many buildings are selected.

“There are only 90 designated properties in the entire city,” Turner said. “There are many more listed properties. There are 289 of those. The majority of properties in both categories are mostly residential, but there are city owned properties designated like city hall in Lindsay and Coronation Hall in Omemee. Some churches have also been designated along with downtown Lindsay and the 12 homes on Oak Street in Fenelon Falls.”

Bill 23

Even though Bill 23 has only been in place since November 2022, Turner says it has impacted how heritage deals with property preservation “so much.”

“The bill includes a sunset clause on listing properties,” Turner said. “A property can only be listed for two years and then it has to be designated or removed from the list.”

Turner said that listing as a heritage property has very little impact on the homeowner, but serves the purpose in giving the municipality a say regarding demolition or redevelopment. Turner called listing “a softer touch” for the municipality and homeowner than designation.

Bill 23 is also going to make it harder to designate a building with changes made to the Provincial Heritage Act. Previously, a building could be designated by a municipality for one of nine reasons that include architectural value, historical value, who lived there, the building’s relation to wider historical themes in the community, who was the designer, who built it, whether it is a community landmark and how it contributes to the overall streetscape.

To designate a building in the future, two of these characteristics will now be needed. 

“This bill limits the ability of municipalities to shape the communities they want to have.” Turner suggested, “It is going to make it very difficult. Everyone in the built heritage sector is fearful that (this bill) will lead to more heritage buildings being torn down.”

Turner says council has already seen a summary of Bill 23 and its changes, and know what is coming.

“(Because of Bill 23) we will be focusing our efforts on non-residential properties for designation,” Turner said. “They are at the highest risk of redevelopment or demolition. While designation of residential properties has a lot of merit,” Turner says, “it is not now the best thing to do.”